In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court reprimanded YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia for his use of vulgar language during a hearing regarding the merging of multiple FIRs filed against him in the ‘India’s Got Latent’ controversy.
Supreme Court Criticism and Relief Granted
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court slammed Allahbadia’s conduct before ultimately granting him protection from arrest. However, the court imposed a condition that he must not accompany his counsel to the police station. Furthermore, the court ruled that no additional FIRs would be filed in connection with this case.
Court Questions Allahbadia’s Language
Before granting relief, the Supreme Court confronted Ranveer Allahbadia’s counsel, questioning his stance on the obscene language used by his client. The court asked, “Do you subscribe to his language? How do you behave yourself?” and inquired about the parameters of obscenity.
Case Background and Legal Proceedings
Ranveer Allahbadia is facing multiple FIRs for allegedly inappropriate comments made on comedian Samay Raina’s YouTube show, ‘India’s Got Latent’. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh is currently hearing the case.
Justice Surya Kant criticized Allahbadia’s behavior, stating, “He is insulting parents also! There is something dirty in this person’s mind that has been spread through this program. Why should the courts favor him?”
The bench further commented, “Somebody thinks that because they have become popular, they can say anything and take society for granted… Tell us, is there anyone in the world who would accept such words?” Justice Kant then questioned Allahbadia’s counsel, asking, “Are you defending these kinds of statements?”
Legal Arguments on Obscenity
Senior advocate Chandrachud, representing Allahbadia, responded, “Not at all. I personally am disgusted. But whether it rises to the level of a criminal offense is another question.”
In response, Justice Kant reiterated concerns about the nature of the language used and emphasized that popularity does not grant immunity from accountability. He further noted, “There are only two FIRs as far as we know, not many. Just because you are popular, you cannot take society for granted. Is there anyone on earth who would like this language? There is something very dirty in his mind which has been vomited. Why should we protect him?”
Supreme Court’s Final Decision
Despite the strong criticism, the Supreme Court granted Allahbadia protection from arrest. However, the court prohibited him from accompanying his counsel to the police station, ensuring that further investigations proceed without undue interference.
This case highlights the growing scrutiny on social media influencers and content creators, emphasizing the legal and ethical responsibilities that come with public influence.
